I've been a fan of Professor Lawrence Krauss for years now. He is a theoretical physicist actively engaged in the debate between theism and atheism. His most recent book, A Universe from Nothing, was a best seller that explains just how it is possible that a universe can come from what we think is "nothing". This theory forms the basis many atheists, including myself, use to show how the hand of god is not required to get a universe.
Prof. Krauss recently participated in an Intelligence2 debate arguing on behalf of atheism along with Michael Shermer. He opens the debate debunking the apparent fine tuning of the universe's laws, then shows how Darwin demonstrated that the evolution of life didn't require the hand of god, and finally he argues that a universe that came from precisely nothing, would look exactly like the universe we see and observe today. This is the actual knock down argument that removes the hand of god from his last bastion of hope.
But does this mean science refutes god? I would say that science will never be able to definitively disprove god. Rather, all science actually needs to do, is demonstrate a plausible natural alternative. Science can then show that the hand of god is not required.
One great thing about the Intelligence2 debates is that they invite the audience to vote before and after the debate so you can see exactly how persuasive the arguments really were. So watch the debate below and ask yourself whether science refutes god.